Chemical free water treatment (Ultra low frequency)

[GreenDesert]

thread164-151999

Hi, is anyone able to recall what was the discussion in the link referred in this old thread? Thank you.

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=146946&page=1

 

[bimr]

A deluded believer in water gadgets sponsored a forum and posted his opinions on water gadgets. The forum was a long discussion on water gadgets.

There were links to a few internet sites that contained lists of debunked water gadgets like these:

http://www.chem1.com/CQ/magscams.html

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/magnetic_water_and_fuel_treatment_myth_magic_or_mainstream_science

The forum was called Alternative Water Treatment was listed for a long time and the person must have stopped paying for it.

 

[GreenDesert]

Thank you very much bimr.

Was there a detailed discussion about the Ultra Low Frequency water treatment for cooling tower water before?

I found that the company (Ecospec Singapore) which was referred in the previous thread （

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=151999）

is still active in market and their product is being used in hospital cooling water (

http://www.ecospec.com/resources/ck/files/Yishun Community Hospital(2).pdf).

However I cannot find much details about the product details.

Recently I came across a tender specification and it also specified Ultra Low Frequency method as the way for the cooling water treatment and the project consultant is a leading company (AECOM).

 

[PEDARRIN2]

A problem with a lot of the systems that have "some" credibility is there is typically not any consensus, peer reviewed testing to verify how/why they work. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence, but not a lot of usable information for the engineer to take to a client.

Some of them are getting independent testing, but they are far and few between.

So the engineer has to fight the client who sees an equipment website which they think will work, or they know somebody who has one at home which seems to work, so they want to know why it won't work for them.

The engineer can quote all the science they want, but if it works for A, why can it not work for me?

 

[bimr]

There would be many water experts put out of work if these gadgets had any merit. The use of gadgets in the treatment of water is not new. Failures of these gadgets in this industry is common. Unfortunately, these gadget sellers often make false product claims and never cease to amaze the industry with their creativity and devotion to generate sales. No industry or product is insulated from this phenomenon. Throughout its history, the water improvement industry certainly has fallen prey to wild marketing tactics and false promises including the manufacturing, marketing and sales of water treatment gadgets.

There was one device reviewed that worked with electric frequency:

http://www.prochemtech.com/Literature/Technical/PDF_NCD_IWC_2004.pdf

There are about 20 listed gadgets that use frequency on this site:

http://www.chem1.com/CQ/gallery.html

List of gadgets:

http://www.chem1.com/CQ/aquacrack.html

http://www.martechsystems.com/downloads/tech_nonchemtreatmentsys.pdf

The US government was victimized so many times that the army did an evaluation:

http://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/search/asset/1002400

http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?160747-BacComber-water-treatment-pseudoscience

The fact that someone at AECOM specified one of these gadgets is meaningless, it just shows that there is at least one moron that works there.